Microsoft Flight Simulator

# Microsoft Flight Simulator with AMD Ryzen 5 5600X + Intel Arc B390

This combination of an AMD Ryzen 5 5600X processor and Intel Arc B390 graphics places at rank 2665 out of 2996 tested combos in Microsoft Flight Simulator, putting it in the bottom 11% of all systems tested. The data shows a system that is heavily constrained by its graphics component, with the CPU's substantial multi-threading capabilities far outpacing what the GPU can deliver in this flight simulator.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo ranks 2665th out of 2996 tested combinations, placing it in the 89th percentile of all tested systems — meaning roughly 89% of tested combos deliver higher frame rates in Microsoft Flight Simulator. This is a low ranking, and the measured FPS data confirms the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher resolutions and settings.

The ranking reflects a fundamental imbalance between the two components. The Ryzen 5 5600X is a capable desktop processor that sits in the 75th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Arc B390 sits in just the 9th percentile among all GPUs. When a CPU at the 75th percentile is paired with a GPU at the 9th percentile, the GPU becomes the limiting factor in essentially every scenario. The data indicates that this combo behaves like a CPU-rich, GPU-poor configuration, which is particularly problematic for a visually demanding title like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 1482 places it within 2.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 and within 1.3% of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX. These are entry-level graphics solutions from previous generations, and the comparison underscores why this combo ranks so low. The CPU, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 21771, which is within 0.6% of the AMD EPYC 9554P and within 0.5% of both the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 6650U and Intel Core i7-11700. This creates a stark mismatch: the CPU competes with high-end server and desktop parts, while the GPU competes with legacy entry-level mobile parts.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B390 is an integrated graphics solution (IGP) based on the Xe3-LPG architecture with a 3 nm process node from Intel. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz, and it uses system shared memory, meaning its memory bandwidth is system dependent. The GPU has 1536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 raster output units, and 12 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 7.680 TFLOPS and FP16 performance of 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1).

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the GPU's role is critical because the game renders vast, detailed landscapes with complex lighting and shadow calculations. The measured FPS data shows the GPU's limitations clearly. At 1080p with Low settings, the system achieves 56 FPS, but at 1080p with Ultra settings, it drops to 31 FPS. The GPU's 9th percentile ranking among all GPUs indicates that it performs worse than approximately 91% of tested graphics solutions, which explains why frame rates are so low even at modest settings.

The GPU scored 1482 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, which is its only recorded benchmark. This score is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX (1463), 1.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce 800M (1460), 2.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM (1446), and 2.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 (1443). These deltas are small, placing the Arc B390 in the same performance class as these legacy entry-level GPUs. For a flight simulator that demands consistent frame rates for smooth scenery rendering, this level of GPU performance is insufficient for high-fidelity experiences.

CPU Role

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X is a 6-core, 12-thread processor from the 5000 series, built on the Zen 3 architecture (codenamed Vermeer) using a 7 nm process from TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of L3 cache. It supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, and it has a 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator, the CPU handles flight physics, AI traffic, weather simulation, and the core game logic. The 5600X's benchmark results show strong performance across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 11838, and its single-core score is 1541. In Geekbench, it scores 9173 multi-core and 1989 single-core. PassMark results show a multithread score of 21858 and a single-thread score of 3364. The CPU's 3DMark scores scale from 917 for single-thread to 5588 for max threads, indicating efficient scaling across its 12 threads.

The CPU's nearest rivals in average benchmark score include the AMD Ryzen 7 4800H at 21749 (0.1% lower), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 6650U at 21874 (0.5% higher), the Intel Core i7-11700 at 21891 (0.5% higher), and the AMD EPYC 9554P at 21899 (0.6% higher). This places the 5600X squarely in the middle of a competitive pack of processors, all within 0.6% of each other. The CPU's performance is more than adequate for this game's simulation demands, but it is wasted when paired with a GPU that cannot keep up with the rendering workload.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system achieves an average of 56 FPS on Low settings, 43 FPS on Medium settings (with a minimum of 37 FPS and maximum of 50 FPS), 33 FPS on High settings, and 31 FPS on Ultra settings. The 1080p Low result is the only configuration that breaks the 60 FPS threshold, and it does not; 56 FPS is the highest average across all tested settings and resolutions.

At 2560x1440, performance drops to 45 FPS on Low, 35 FPS on Medium (minimum 30 FPS, maximum 40 FPS), 26 FPS on High, and 25 FPS on Ultra. The 1440p results show a clear pattern: every settings tier costs approximately 8-11 FPS compared to the equivalent 1080p setting. The Low preset at 1440p still achieves 45 FPS, which is marginally playable, but Medium drops to 35 FPS, and High and Ultra fall below 30 FPS.

At 3840x2160, the system manages 33 FPS on Low, 26 FPS on Medium (minimum 22 FPS, maximum 30 FPS), 19 FPS on High, and 19 FPS on Ultra. The 4K results are uniformly poor, with even Low settings failing to reach 35 FPS. Both High and Ultra produce identical average FPS of 19, suggesting the GPU is fully saturated at this resolution regardless of the visual fidelity settings applied.

Across all resolutions, the pattern is consistent: Low settings deliver the highest frame rates, Medium delivers a moderate step down, and High and Ultra deliver similar performance at the bottom end. The gap between Low and Ultra is 25 FPS at 1080p (56 to 31), 20 FPS at 1440p (45 to 25), and 14 FPS at 4K (33 to 19). This shrinking gap at higher resolutions indicates that the GPU becomes the dominant bottleneck as pixel count increases, reducing the impact of settings changes.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS drop from 1080p to 4K reveals where the system's bottleneck lies. At Low settings, performance falls from 56 FPS at 1080p to 45 FPS at 1440p and 33 FPS at 4K — a total drop of 23 FPS (approximately 41%) from 1080p to 4K. At Medium settings, the drop goes from 43 FPS at 1080p to 35 FPS at 1440p and 26 FPS at 4K — a total drop of 17 FPS (approximately 40%). At High settings, the drop is from 33 FPS at 1080p to 26 FPS at 1440p and 19 FPS at 4K — a drop of 14 FPS (approximately 42%). At Ultra settings, the drop is from 31 FPS at 1080p to 25 FPS at 1440p and 19 FPS at 4K — a drop of 12 FPS (approximately 39%).

The consistent proportional drop of roughly 40% across all settings from 1080p to 4K indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component. If the CPU were the bottleneck, the FPS drop would be less pronounced at higher resolutions because the CPU workload does not scale with pixel count. Instead, the uniform scaling suggests that the Arc B390's rendering throughput is the constraint, and increasing resolution directly reduces frame rates in a predictable manner.

The narrowing absolute FPS gap between Low and Ultra settings as resolution increases further confirms this analysis. At 1080p, the settings range spans 25 FPS; at 1440p, it spans 20 FPS; at 4K, it spans only 14 FPS. When the GPU is heavily loaded at 4K, changes in settings have less impact because the GPU is already near its maximum capacity. This is a classic signature of GPU-bound performance, and it explains why the system cannot deliver playable frame rates at higher resolutions regardless of settings adjustments.

FAQ

Q: What is the best frame rate this combo achieves in Microsoft Flight Simulator?

A: The highest average FPS measured is 56 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that approaches a stable 60 FPS experience, and it falls short of that threshold.

Q: Can this system run Microsoft Flight Simulator at 4K?

A: At 3840x2160, the system achieves 33 FPS on Low settings, 26 FPS on Medium, and 19 FPS on both High and Ultra. None of these results reach 30 FPS on High or Ultra, making 4K playable only at Low settings, and even then only marginally.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B390 compare to its nearest GPU rivals?

A: The Arc B390 scores 1482 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 1.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX, 1.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce 800M, 2.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625 OEM, and 2.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in this combo?

A: The GPU is the limiting factor. The Ryzen 5 5600X ranks in the 75th percentile among CPUs, while the Arc B390 ranks in the 9th percentile among GPUs. The resolution scaling data shows a consistent FPS drop from 1080p to 4K, indicating GPU-bound performance.

Q: What settings provide the best experience at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Medium settings deliver 43 FPS average with a minimum of 37 FPS, which provides a better frame rate than High (33 FPS) or Ultra (31 FPS) while maintaining higher visual quality than Low (56 FPS).

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 5600X compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score of 21771 is 0.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 4800H, 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 6650U, 0.5% lower than the Intel Core i7-11700, and 0.6% lower than the AMD EPYC 9554P.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS data, the recommended configuration for this combo is 1920x1080 with Medium settings. This delivers an average of 43 FPS with a minimum of 37 FPS and a maximum of 50 FPS, providing the best balance between visual fidelity and playability. The Medium preset at 1080p keeps frame rates above 35 FPS even in demanding scenes, which is important for a flight simulator where smooth scenery rendering enhances the experience.

For users who prioritize frame rate over visual quality, 1920x1080 with Low settings is the only configuration that approaches 60 FPS, achieving 56 FPS on average. This is the recommended choice if smoothness is the primary concern, though it sacrifices significant visual detail. At 2560x1440, Low settings at 45 FPS is the only playable option, while Medium at 35 FPS may be acceptable for less demanding flight scenarios. At 3840x2160, all settings produce frame rates below 35 FPS, with Low at 33 FPS being the least poor option, but 4K is not recommended for this combo given the consistently sub-30 FPS results on Medium and above.

The Ultra preset should be avoided at all resolutions. At 1080p it delivers only 31 FPS, at 1440p it delivers 25 FPS, and at 4K it delivers 19 FPS — all below the threshold for a smooth flight simulation experience. High settings offer marginal improvements over Ultra (2 FPS at 1080p, 1 FPS at 1440p, and identical 19 FPS at 4K), but neither preset provides acceptable performance at 1440p or 4K. The data clearly indicates that this combo is best suited for 1080p gaming with Medium settings, which offers the most favorable trade-off between visual quality and frame rate consistency.